This campaign ist about to organize an international actionday around the 8th of June, the day that George Orwell’s 1984 has been published for the very first time.

It is our goal to raise attention on how far Mr. Orwells visions already has become true, having a special focus on how scarily far CCTV technology has been grown to and how our societies are being driven by this development.

We are nothing more or less than an open group, a collection of human beings and non-governmental organisations raising big concerns about newest developments of tracking, tracing, face recognition and data investigations.We are independent and above party lines.Everybody is welcome to join.

Yes! Its true, Anonymous Hackers released their own Operating System with name “Anonymous-OS”, is Live is an ubuntu-based distribution and created under Ubuntu 11.10 and uses Mate desktop. You can create the LiveUSB with Unetbootin.Pre-installed apps on Anonymous-OS:
– ParolaPass Password Generator
– Find Host IP
– Anonymous HOIC
– Ddosim
– Pyloris
– Slowloris
– TorsHammer
– Sqlmap
– Havij
– Sql Poison
– Admin Finder
– John the Ripper
– Hash Identifier
– Tor
– XChat IRC
– Pidgin
– Vidalia
– Polipo
– JonDo
– i2p
– Wireshark
– Zenmap
…and moreWarning :It is not developed by any Genuine Source, can be backdoored OS by any Law enforcement Company or Hacker. Use at your own Risk.

Update: Another Live OS for anonymity available called “Tails“. Which is a live CD or live USB that aims at preserving your privacy and anonymity.It helps you to use the Internet anonymously almost anywhere you go and on any computer:all connections to the Internet are forced to go through the Tor network or to leave no trace on the computer you’re using unless you ask it explicitly, or use state-of-the-art cryptographic tools to encrypt your files, email and instant messaging. You can Download Tail from Here

It’s not often that a half hour online documentary about conflict in an African country gets over 7 million views in the space of two days. But that is exactly what ‘Kony 2012′, a video produced by non-profit Invisible Children and directed by Jason Russell, has achieved.

On Vimeo, the video received 5.4 million views, while on YouTube, it’s closing in on 2 million, with no signs of slowing down. It’s hard to watch at times, telling the story of tens of thousands of Ugandan children who have been abducted into an army, forced to fight for a man who will do anything to stay in a position of power. Some estimates put the number of children who have been forced to fight for Joseph Kony as high as 66,000.

Leading the Lord’s Resistance Army (LRA), Joseph Kony is at the top of the International Criminal Court’s (ICC) list of war criminals. Since 1986, the LRA has continued to commit crimes against humanity including rape, murder, enslavement and pillaging. His history is a long list of anguish and death, which has for the most part, gone unnoticed by the world.

Invisible Children’s campaign, Kony 2012, is changing that. In the space of two days, the story has been catapulted to the forefront of several social networks, and has been noticed by millions of people. At the time of writing, there are 3 trending topics dedicated to the issue on Twitter, with hundreds of thousands of tweets containing a variety of keywords including Kony, Kony2012, Uganda and Invisible Children.

Kony Twitter How an online documentary about a Ugandan warlord received over 7 million views in two days

So what exactly is Invisible Children calling on people to do? Kony 2012 is an elaborate campaign which aims to make Kony famous. The campaign calls on getting 20 well-known celebrities on board, and having them bring more attention to the cause.

Taylor Swift, Rihanna, Zooey Deschanel and Stephen Fry are among the first to have taken to Twitter to spread the word. Kony 2012 is also encouraging people to contact 12 policy makers in the US who can make a difference to ensure that real change is brought about.

On April 20, the campaign is culminating offline. With hundreds of thousands of posters, stickers and flyers printed and available for purchase, Jason explains in the video what will take place. “We will meet at sundown and blanket every street in every city until the sun comes up. We will be smart and we will be thorough. The rest of the world will go to bed Friday night, and wake up to hundreds of thousands of posters demanding justice on every corner.”

He goes on, ”The technology that has brought our planet together is allowing us to respond to the problems of our friends.”

Invisible Children is no stranger to successful social media campaigns. Between its Twitter and Facebook accounts, it has almost 1 million fans, and has a strong, active and engaging online presence.

That said, the campaign has taken on a huge task – not only to “make Kony famous”, but for that infamy to result in his arrest, in the space of just one year.

To find out more about the campaign, and how to get involved, check out the official Kony 2012 page, and if you’re not one of the millions of people who has already seen the documentary, check it out below:

“To our hacker allies, our fellow occupiers, our militant comrades all over the world, the time for talk is over: it’s time to hack and smash, beat and shag.”

The call to arms issued last week by the international hacker group Anonymous was accompanied by a frenzy of online hacking. Attackers took down the websites of a tear-gas manufacturer in Pennsylvania, the Nasdaq and BATS stock exchanges and the Chicago Board Options Exchange. A few days later they hacked into websites owned by the Federal Trade Commission and the Bureau of Consumer Protection.

The messages they left behind—about their opposition to everything from the Anti-Counterfeiting Trade Agreement, a controversial new treaty for enforcing intellectual property rights, to violent suppression of democracy protestors in the Middle East—had the air of giddy jubilation.

“Guess what? We’re back for round two,” the hackers wrote in reference to their attack on the FTC websites, their second such raid on the agency in less than a month. “With the doomsday clock ticking down on Internet freedom, Antisec has leapt into action. Again. Holy deja vu hack Batman! Expect us yet?”

Comic posturing aside, the hackers seemed amazed by their success: A barely organized ragtag “team of mayhem,” as one Anonymous offshoot dubbed itself, was knocking down the Web infrastructure built by major corporations and large government agencies as if it were nothing but paper backdrops in a school play.

The hackers hadn’t discovered some secret digital weapon. They weren’t exploiting some zero-day vulnerability in a core application. They weren’t backed by a powerful government agency. They didn’t even have the advantage of surprise—the group has been around in one form or another for almost a decade.

Yet they were winning—easily—against targets as noteworthy as the U.S. Department of Justice, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, the White House and Citigroup.

The victories underscore what is perhaps both the main point of the global Anonymous movement and the secret of its success—that the people in charge, whether they be in Alexandria, Egypt or Alexandria, Virginia—are too corrupt, too complacent and too careless too be trusted. Almost nothing makes that point as effectively as Internet security: Officials have known that the networks were vulnerable for well over a decade and have chosen to do little about it.

Anonymous lays siege to websites using a method called “distributed denial of service” or DDoS. There is nothing new about a DDoS attack, which basically floods a computer that is connected to the Internet with messages, such as connection requests, until it crashes.

The threat of DDoS was raised as far back as February 2000, when successful attacks on Amazon, eBay, CNN, Buy.com and Yahoo made headlines around the world.

Since then the size and frequency of DDoS attacks has continued to increase. Akamai, whose content delivery network spans 80,000 servers in 70 countries, recently reported that DDoS attack incidents had soared 2,000 percent in the past three years. Experts describe DDoS attacks of 10 Gigabits per second and larger as “the new normal.” IT analyst groups like Forrester and Gartner regularly advise their clients to invest in DDoS protection.

But the ongoing rout of large government and corporate sites by Anonymous indicates few are listening.

“Internet security is like life insurance,” said Carlos Morales, vice president of sales engineering for Arbor Networks, which sells DDoS protection to network operators and Internet service providers around the world. “A lot of people don’t think they need life insurance until they have a major event like a heart attack.”

Robert Ayoub, an analyst with Frost and Sullivan describes a pass-the-buck mentality. “Traditionally, companies have seen DDoS as an issue for service providers or the government,” he said, noting that differentiating between a legitimate spike in traffic from an attack isn’t easy.

Part of the reluctance of major corporations and government agencies to address DDoS may be that effective protection isn’t cheap. It requires investing in bandwidth, hardware and expertise. Traffic has to be filtered in the cloud and on-premises using a variety of techniques and equipment, which has to be licensed and maintained. Ideally, the two systems are coordinated, so that when an attack is discovered on-premises, a company can request help from its Internet service provider.

Basic cloud protection alone starts at about $5,000 a month. But that cost can increase exponentially depending on the volume of traffic and the size of the site that’s under attack.

Experts will tell you that scrimping isn’t really an option. In addition to attacks by Anonymous, companies, and financial institutions in particular, are coping with DDoS attacks by criminal gangs who use ever more sophisticated tools.

According to the World Infrastructure Security Report, which was published by Arbor Networks earlier this month, attackers are upping the ante by using DDoS to take out critical applications like HTTP, DNS. SMTP and also launching multi-vector attacks—making protection more costly.

The survey’s respondents, which included 114 self-classified Tier 1, Tier 2 and other IP networks operators, said the cost of single DDoS attack could range from $8,000 to $1.5 million dollars. More than 44 percent of respondents experienced between 10 and 500 DDoS attacks per month.

Despite the large numbers of successful attacks, security personnel who responded to the survey—more than 70 percent were engineers and/or managers—had difficulty getting the ear of higher ups. The majority of respondents said their companies had ten or fewer employees working in security and a whopping 58 percent had never rehearsed their security plans.

Efforts to defend networks so far have been so ineffectual that Anonymous recently posted its plans, Joker style, to take the Internet down on March 31. The hackers provided a blueprint for “Operation Global Blackout,” daring network operators to make the changes need to prevent the attack.

“We know you won’t listen,” Anonymous wrote. “We know you won’t change. We know it’s because you don’t want to. We know it’s because you like it how it is.”

Millions of computer users across the world could be blocked off from the Internet as early as March 8 if the FBI follows through with plans to yank a series of servers originally installed to combat corruption.

Last year, authorities in Estonia apprehended six men believed responsible for creating a malicious computer script called the DNSChanger Trojan. Once set loose on the Web, the worm corrupted computers in upwards of 100 countries, including an estimated 500,000 in America alone. The US Federal Bureau of Investigation later stepped up by replacing the rogue Trojan with servers of their own in an attempt to remediate the damage, but the fix was only temporary. Now the FBI is expected to end use of those replacement servers as early as next month and, at that point, the Internet for millions could essentially be over.

When functioning as its creators intended, the DNSChanger Trojan infected computers and redirected users hoping to surf to certain websites to malicious ones. Traditionally, DNS, or Domain Name System, servers translate alphabetical, traditional website URLs to their actual, numeric counterpart in order to guide users across the World Wide Web. Once infected by the DNSChanger Trojan, however, websites entered into Internet browsers were hijacked to malicious servers and, in turn, directed the user to an unintended, fraudulent site.

In coordination with the arrests in Estonia, the FBI shut down the malicious DNSChanger botnet network, and, additionally, replaced them with surrogate servers to correct the problem. Those servers, however, were installed “just long enough for companies and home users to remove DNSChanger malware from their machines,” according to the court order that established them. That deadline is March 8, and those surrogate servers are expected to be retired then. At that point, computers still infected with the Trojan will be essentially unable to navigate the Internet.

Who, exactly, will be affected? Security company IID (Internet Identity) believes that half of all Fortune 500 companies and more than two dozen major government entities in the US are still currently infected with the worm as of early 2012. Unless they take the proper steps to eradicate the Trojan from their systems, millions of users worldwide will be left hog-tied, helplessly attempting to navigate to nonexistent servers and, in effect, without the Web.

“At this rate, a lot of users are going to see their Internet break on March 8,” Rod Rasmussen, president and chief technology officer at Internet Identity, cautions Krebs On Security.

Currently, both the computer industry and law enforcement are working together through a coalition they’ve established called the DNSChanger Working Group. That group has been tasked with examining the options in phasing out the surrogate servers set up by the feds, but unless an alternative plan is agreed on, a great port of the Web will go dark next month.

“I’m guessing a lot more people would care at that point,” Rasmussen adds. While infected users are cautioned to correct the problem now, millions internationally are still believed to be infected. “It certainly would be an interesting social experiment if these systems just got cut off,” he adds.

Apple struck a blow against video game clones today by removing several offending apps from one rather prolific independent developer.

Among the removed games are apps such as Plant vs. Zombie, Angry Ninja Birds, and Temple Jump, each of which (as you might guess from their titles) had more than a little in common with with major titles such as Plants vs. Zombies, Angry Birds, and Temple Run, respectively.

The recently-removed Temple Jump in particular saw some notable success on the iTunes App Store, reaching the very top of the paid app chart, according to a report by technology blog TechCrunch.

All of the alleged app “clones” mentioned above come from independent developer Anton Sinelnikov. According to a Twitter post from iOS developer David Smith, Sinelnikov had 68 iOS apps available this morning — as of this writing, only nine remain.

This controversy is just the latest in a string of alleged copycat scenarios in the mobile space. Over the past few days, social gaming giant Zynga has been accused of copying not one, but two existing iOS apps, and Spry Fox has sued publisher 6waves Lolapps for supposedly lifting ideas from the match-three puzzle game Triple Town.

Despite these numerous incidents, this is one of the rare occasions where a platform holder has stepped in to police the situation itself.

“We’re really happy with how quickly Apple responded to the situation and removed [Temple Jump],” Imangi co-founder Natalia Luckyanova told Gamasutra. “The app was clearly a scam that traded entirely on the popularity of Temple Run and was packaged to confuse users.”

Luckyanova added that the Temple Jump app succeeded in confusing its audience, as a number of consumers accidentally purchased the app, thinking it was a tie in to Imangi’s popular title.

“This was really upsetting to us and damaging to our brand, because we work really hard to put out very high quality polished games and win the love of our fans, and we don’t want them to think that we would put out crap to steal a dollar from them,” she said.

As noted by TechCrunch, Apple’s iTunes App Store has a few systems in place to police the numerous available apps, but beyond submitting reviews and reporting bugs or offensive content, iOS users have no direct way to flag titles that mimic existing apps.

Luckyanova, however, says platform holders can’t be held responsible for stopping app scams, as such an undertaking would make the app review process far too complex.

“I don’t think there’s a perfect solution, because you need human judgement involved in the system. The platform holder can’t realistically police copyright violations, or just misleading apps. As developers, we sign an agreement saying that we have obtained all the IP permissions necessary for our work, so that responsibility is on the developer,” she said.

“I guess I don’t have a solution, because I wouldn’t want reviews to be even more strictly policed. The good thing is that most stores have a way to appeal the process if something does slip through the cracks.”

Last week, Apple revealed that third-party app developers — copycats and otherwise — have earned a total of $4 billion dollars through the Mac and iOS app stores so far.

Twitter now has the ability to silence tweets on a country-by-country basis. If it’s given a valid and legal request to block a message in a particular country, the service says, it will make that message invisible to users located there. Freedom of speech advocates came down hard on the company. Twitter maintains it’s “extremely passionate about people’s right to free expression,” said spokesperson Rachel Bremer.

Twitter announced on Thursday that it can now withhold content from users country by country on demand, while still making that content available to the rest of the world.

The news sparked widespread anger as critics accused the microblogging service of censorship and warned that the policy might impede popular anti-government movements such as those seen during the “Arab Spring,” which toppled several dictatorial governments in the Middle East last year.

“This does appear to constitute censorship,” Yasha Heidari, managing partner at the Heidari Power Law Group, told TechNewsWorld.

However, Twitter is probably not benefiting from this or imposing the censorship voluntarily, Heidari suggested, as “this provision and censorship comes at the cost of Twitter doing business in certain countries that demand [such censorship].”

On the other hand, “more and more, Twitter is being used to rally to a political cause which does not want to align with [its] business model,” said Darren Hayes, CIS program chair at Pace University. For example, Anonymous has been actively using Twitter to communicate and organize.

“If Twitter wants to continue to prosper, then support from local government and corporations is more valuable than freedom of speech,” Hayes told TechNewsWorld.

“Our announcement is not at all about Twitter censoring tweets,” Twitter spokesperson Rachel Bremer said. “This will only happen in reaction to valid legal process.”

Twitter feels “extremely passionate about people’s right to free expression,” Bremer told TechNewsWorld. “I want to stress that that is not changing.”
What Twitter’s Going to Change

Previously, Twitter could only remove content globally at the request of various governments. It cited pro-Nazi content, which is restricted by the French and German governments, as an example.

Now, Twitter can withhold content from users in a specific country while keeping it available to the general public elsewhere.

If the microblogging site’s required to withhold a Tweet, it will try to let the user know and will mark when the content has been withheld. Such information will be put up on its page at Chilling Effects.

Chilling Effects is a clearinghouse that’s a collaboration among law school clinics and the Electronic Frontier Foundation. It collects and analyzes legal complaints about online activity.
Rage Against the Twitter Machine

Public reaction to Twitter’s announcement was prompt — and largely furious.

Reporters Without Borders has written to Twitter chairman Jack Dorsey voicing its deep concern about the policy and stating that it restricts freedom of expression.

Anonymous’s Twitter page has several Tweets disparaging the new policy, with one suggesting that it could be connected with Saudi billionaire Prince Alwaleed bin Talal’s purchase in December of a $300 million stake in the microblogging site.

However, Alwaleed’s move probably has less to do with Twitter’s new policy than recent events such as Anonymous’s use of the microblogging site to communicate and organize, Pace University’s Hayes suggested.

“At the beginning of the Occupy Wall Street movement, Anonymous were tweeting about how they were going to launch attacks on the FBI and Wall Street firms,” Pace elaborated. “Prior to this, we were learning about Twitter accounts in Georgia being hacked by Russians during the conflict in Ossetia.”
The Real Culprits?

Twitter’s new policy “is a cost of globalization,” Heidari suggested.

The company has to obey local laws in the countries where it does business, Heidari pointed out. The alternative is to “refuse to do business or make its service available in those countries, which, in effect, would produce the same result as the censorship.”
With a Nod and a Wink

However, Twitter’s apparently not just going to implement censorship whenever requested to do so.

Its announcement appears to provide a workaround to users. It points users to a link about their account settings that takes them to Twitter’s page on how to change the country setting.

That link makes it clear that Twitter doesn’t store the country setting in association with user accounts; instead, browser cookie stores and updates the country setting. So changes in the country setting won’t save across browsers or computers.

“Because geo-location by IP address is an imperfect science, we allow users to manually set their country,” Twitter’s Bremer said.

However, this is “simply a workaround,” and shouldn’t be considered a proper cure for the problem, Heidari stated. Still, “even in the most oppressive of regimes, information has always been distributed, even at the cost of death.”

Like this:

The World Government Data Store and its associated API is easy to use and contains well over 2,000 datasets indexed from government data stores and it is growing all the time. Here we show you how to use the API and embed results simply into your site or mashup.

Governments around the globe are opening up their data vaults – allowing you to check out, visualise and analyse the numbers for yourself. Just over a week ago the UK Government opened its data store to the public, an action The Guardian’s Free Our Data campaign has long campaigned for. We felt there was a fascinating opportunity for us to build a missing link, which is a World Government Data Store where you can find statistics on a particular theme from data stores in any country that has opened up. By having datasets from all over the world in one centralised place, it is much easier for you to compare and contrast data.

As we wanted this resource to be widely used by developers we created a simple API onto the data store. The API allows you to search government data from the UK, USA, Australia and New Zealand from our index. We’ll keep adding new data sets and new countries as they open up and we index them.

‘Working excessive overtime without a single day off during the week’
‘Living together in crowded dorms and exposure to dangerous chemicals’
Two explosions in 2011 in China ‘due to aluminum dust’ killed four workers
Almost 140 injured after using toxin in factory, reports New York Times

By Mark Duell

Last updated at 8:10 AM on 27th January 2012

Comments (420)
Share

Working excessive overtime without a single day off during the week, living together in crowded dormitories and standing so long that their legs swell and they can hardly walk after a 24-hour shift.

These are the lives some employees claim they live at Apple’s manufacturing centres in China, where the firm’s suppliers allegedly wrongly dispose of hazardous waste and produce improper records.

Almost 140 workers at a supplier in China were injured two years ago using a poisonous chemical to clean iPhone screens – and two explosions last year killed four people while injuring more than 75.

The CleanIT Project
The Clean IT project is carried out with the financial support from the Prevention of and Fight against Crime Programme of the European Union, European Commission – Directorate-General Justice, Freedom and Security.

Over the last few months – as Peru helped guide the United Nations climate negotiations – five separate oil spills along a main oil pipeline through the Amazon have spewed thick black clots of crude across jungle and swamp and carpeted local fishing lagoons with dead fish.

Earlier this month, the world's eyes were on Lima as 196 nations debated what to do about climate change at the UN COP20 climate summit. While world leaders debated, negotiated, signed and didn't sign agreements, Amazon Watch and our allies sounded the alarm on the critical importance of the Amazon rainforest and indigenous ancestral territories in […]

This month's hearing before Canada's Supreme Court was Chevron's last appeal to try to stop a full enforcement trial. Chevron audaciously asked the court to ignore all precedent, and to change the law just for them.